good premise and pretty well done, but flawed

Rating: Null/10 (11 October 2003)

It is hard to beat a great movie/book about post-apocalyptic life. Alas Babylon, the book, and Omega Man, the movie are examples. It is just incredibly engaging to think of surviving and rebuilding in a world stripped of unearned comfort and phoniness--particularly now, in the most comfortable and the phoniest time in history. 28 Days Later knows the landscape pretty well, and is good, but it is not great. I give it a 7.5, a notch below Dawn of the Dead, mainly because Dawn was more consistently exciting and scary, and its serious themes were just as good. 28 Days Later was good, but I see no real reason to see it again. Among its flaws (**may contain spoilers**): Not enough dangerous encounters with the infected, no real footage of the riotous final days in England, and an excessively quick, unearned ending. Also, why the hell didn't the main guy grab a gun from some dead soldier when he was running through the house in the end. He is no Chuck Heston, and he should have paid for that mistake. The gouging the eyes out scene was excessive, and also unearned. Lastly, the movie gives a subtle encouragement to use illegal drugs, without giving an argument as to why. Sorry, not buying, and not seeing it again, either.